|
Author
|
Topic: Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real?
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 12 of 991 (575839)
08-21-2010 10:04 AM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Dirk
08-20-2010 11:00 PM
|
|
One thing that can be said with a very high degree of confidence is that none of the species that were on the Ark would be alive today. There would be no humans alive today, none of the birds, clean or unclean animals. Every species that was on the Ark would not be around today. The reason is pretty simple. There were only 8 humans, at most fourteen of the clean animals and birds, and only four of each unclean critter. That is well below the minimal size for a sustainable population.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by Dirk, posted 08-20-2010 11:00 PM | | Dirk has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 13 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 10:28 AM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 14 of 991 (575846)
08-21-2010 10:34 AM
|
Reply to: Message 13 by Dr Jack
08-21-2010 10:28 AM
|
|
Re: Viability of small populations
Really? Interesting. Do you have any details?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 13 by Dr Jack, posted 08-21-2010 10:28 AM | | Dr Jack has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 18 by rw23, posted 08-21-2010 11:51 AM | | jar has not replied | | | Message 36 by caffeine, posted 08-23-2010 7:42 AM | | jar has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 20 of 991 (575856)
08-21-2010 12:09 PM
|
Reply to: Message 19 by rw23
08-21-2010 11:53 AM
|
|
Re: Viability of small populations
And that is the very BEST case, and does not include the humans. In the myth found in Genesis 7 it says
quote:
2Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. 3Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.
So the largest breeding population is only seven females of a given kind. The human breeding population is only four females and the unclean breeding population is only two females of any given kind. Note this is the more forgiving version. The version of the myth found in Genesis 6 says that the breeding populations for humans is still but four however all the other kinds only have a breeding population of two females.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 19 by rw23, posted 08-21-2010 11:53 AM | | rw23 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 29 of 991 (575989)
08-22-2010 9:44 AM
|
Reply to: Message 22 by Buzsaw
08-21-2010 10:00 PM
|
|
Buz writes: 3> The pre-flood diet of animals and mankind was vegetarian, there being so much vegetation, fewer, shallower and smaller oceans and a super relatively even temperature globally. Buz, once again you simply post falsehoods, ones that have been shown to be totally refuted and you certainly must be aware that they are false. You have been shown that the Biblical Flood stories are just myths and the Biblical Flood never happened. In addition, you were shown that the diet of humans and animals was not vegetarian in a thread over four years ago.
quote:
There is one well known place where we can look to see if there is ANY reality to the assertion of some super-genome and that is with Oetzi the Iceman. What do we know about Oetzi? First he was both contemporary with Adam and likely a Grandson. He lived about 5300 years ago and so Adam was still alive. His mitochondrial DNA is from the haplogroup K. He was born and his childhood was near the present town of Feldthurns in what today is Italy, but then moved about 50 km south. He was around 40-50 years old when he died. He had eaten twice recently, one Chamois, the other Red Deer meat along with fruit and grain, likely bread. His shoes were composite, soles of bear skin, uppers deerhide. They were insulated with grasses. There was blood from four other people on him. Pollen showed that he ate his last meal in a mid altitude conifer forest and that it was spring time. The biggest thing is that NOTHING was very different. There were NO signs of some Super-Genome in his makeup, the makeup of the other people, the critters or food, the materials used.
Why do you keep posting false information? Edited by jar, : fix link stuff
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 22 by Buzsaw, posted 08-21-2010 10:00 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 30 by Dogmafood, posted 08-22-2010 9:52 AM | | jar has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 32 of 991 (575994)
08-22-2010 11:41 AM
|
Reply to: Message 24 by crashfrog
08-22-2010 1:51 AM
|
|
And if snakes are the descendants of dinosaurs (they're not) post-Ark, then how could there have been a snake at the beginning of Genesis? IIRC we covered some of the evidence that supports Buz Dino ----> Snake Hypothesis here.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 24 by crashfrog, posted 08-22-2010 1:51 AM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: The key is "if the ark was real." It isn't.
I'm sorry but the same genetic bottleneck evidence that absolutely refutes the Biblical flood myths refutes a world-wide flood in the last 200,000 years. It has nothing to with Biblical scholars; it has to do with what was written in the Biblical flood stories that were included in the various Bibles. Sorry but they are simply myth. It really is that simple.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: The key is "if the ark was real." It isn't.
Heading way off topic now but since you ask: There are at least two different stories of some flood in the Bibles. If either of the stories were true and factual, then all living animals with the possible exception of some fish, sea mammals, maybe birds, and all living plants would be descendents of the stock on board the ark; a population of at worst two pair of a critter (male + female) and at best seven pair. That is one amazing genetic bottleneck. If either of the stories were true, whether it happened 4300 years ago or 200,000 years ago, every species should show that genetic bottleneck, all pointing to one specific and uniform event. Well, that genetic bottleneck is not there, but we can see many other genetic bottlenecks that are unique to a species but not unique across species. The missing bottleneck signature means that there was no Biblical flood as described in any of the Bible stories, not 4300 years ago, not 200,00 years ago. They are but myth.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: The key is "if the ark was real." It isn't.
Bullshit. Genetic bottlenecks are a fact and an artifact of the event and the time it happened. Sorry again but we do have genetic information going back even before Adam was created and no sign that anything was lost. In fact we know a lot about the genetics of that period as pointed out in Looking for the Super-Genome. -And it ain't found and in fact some very recent additional information was just found as described in Message 66.
quote:
There is yet more information about Oetzi. As I pointed out back in Message 1, Oetzi would have been contemporary with Adam and so likely very closely related and as pointed out in a recent BBC News story his genetics shows he was from a family that likely originated in the Middle East, was lactose intolerant which would be reasonable for those early farmer/herders just recently thrown out of the foraging lifestyle of the Garden of Eden. He had brown eyes and was predisposed to heart disease. There is also indications that he suffered from Lyme disease.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: The key is "if the ark was real." It isn't.
You really don't know what a genetic bottleneck is, do you? Of course I know what the genetic bottleneck would be if either of the stories are real, it is written in the stories.
jar writes: quote:
In the version of the myth found in Genesis 6 God instructs Noah to:
quote:
19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
In the version of the myth found in Genesis 7 we see similar (close but not the same) instructions:
quote:
2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.
We also find similar explanations of what will be destroyed in Genesis 6 it says:
quote:
7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthmen and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airfor I am grieved that I have made them."
and in Genesis 7:
quote:
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
In both myths lots of critters get killed, in the myth found in Genesis 6 it seems to be talking about land animals and birds while the myth found in Genesis 7 goes even further and wipes out all living things. If we play mix and match and take the best scenario from each of the myths we might be able to claim that only the birds and land animals were wiped out based on the passage from the Genesis 6 story and that we have the larger saved population found in Genesis 7. Based on that mix and match game set we have a situation where all land animals and birds found today will be descended from a population that consisted of at most fourteen critters (seven pairs of clean animals and birds) and at worst case four critters (two pair of unclean animals). Now that is what I would call a real bottleneck. We know we can see bottlenecks in the genetic record; a great example is the one in Cheetahs but we even see them in the human genome and most other species. BUT... If the flood actually happened we would see a bottleneck in EVERY species of animal living on the land and EVERY bird and EVERY one of the bottlenecks show up in the SAME historical time period. Talk about a big RED flag. That bottleneck signature would be something every geneticists in the world would see. It would be like a neon sign, Broadway at midnight on New Years Eve. It would be something even a blind geneticist could see. So it seems to me to be a very simple test that will support or refute the Flood. If that genetic marker is there in EVERY species living on land or bird of the air, then there is support for the flood. It does not prove the flood happened but it would be very strong support. If on the other hand that genetic marker is NOT there, then the Flood is refuted.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 91 by foreveryoung, posted 03-06-2012 3:42 PM | | foreveryoung has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real?
Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real? The answer is what I outlined for you in Message 96:
jar writes: quote:
In the version of the myth found in Genesis 6 God instructs Noah to:
quote:
19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
In the version of the myth found in Genesis 7 we see similar (close but not the same) instructions:
quote:
2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.
We also find similar explanations of what will be destroyed in Genesis 6 it says:
quote:
7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earthmen and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the airfor I am grieved that I have made them."
and in Genesis 7:
quote:
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."
In both myths lots of critters get killed, in the myth found in Genesis 6 it seems to be talking about land animals and birds while the myth found in Genesis 7 goes even further and wipes out all living things. If we play mix and match and take the best scenario from each of the myths we might be able to claim that only the birds and land animals were wiped out based on the passage from the Genesis 6 story and that we have the larger saved population found in Genesis 7. Based on that mix and match game set we have a situation where all land animals and birds found today will be descended from a population that consisted of at most fourteen critters (seven pairs of clean animals and birds) and at worst case four critters (two pair of unclean animals). Now that is what I would call a real bottleneck. We know we can see bottlenecks in the genetic record; a great example is the one in Cheetahs but we even see them in the human genome and most other species. BUT... If the flood actually happened we would see a bottleneck in EVERY species of animal living on the land and EVERY bird and EVERY one of the bottlenecks show up in the SAME historical time period. Talk about a big RED flag. That bottleneck signature would be something every geneticists in the world would see. It would be like a neon sign, Broadway at midnight on New Years Eve. It would be something even a blind geneticist could see. So it seems to me to be a very simple test that will support or refute the Flood. If that genetic marker is there in EVERY species living on land or bird of the air, then there is support for the flood. It does not prove the flood happened but it would be very strong support. If on the other hand that genetic marker is NOT there, then the Flood is refuted.
If the Biblical flood happened, whether it was 4300 years ago or 200,000 years ago, all of the land animals, birds and almost all living land plants that populate the earth today would show that they went through a genetic bottleneck at the very same time. If you wish to claim that there was a world-wide flood like either of the stories recounted in the Bible you MUST present a model that explains why that genetic bottleneck signature is not present.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Which animals would populate the earth if the ark was real?
I did prove you wrong, I am making no assumptions about the past other than what the Bible says. I also provided evidence in Message 29 and in Message 89 which was a direct reply to you that shows that the genes of living things were not significantly different as far back as the alleged time of Adam, even before the supposed Biblical Flood.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 125 of 991 (705091)
08-22-2013 8:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 124 by NoNukes
08-22-2013 7:55 PM
|
|
acause God can learn
That's not related to the Flud; God learned his lesson that that don't work when He got Adam to try the Triceratops as a possible helpmeet.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 124 by NoNukes, posted 08-22-2013 7:55 PM | | NoNukes has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
But the Biblical Flood has been totally refuted for whell over 100 years and no honest sane person today thinks the Biblical flood ever happened.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 145 by mindspawn, posted 08-25-2013 5:54 PM | | mindspawn has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
You have no proof to post.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 149 by mindspawn, posted 08-25-2013 6:40 PM | | mindspawn has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: But the Biblical Flood myths have been totally refuted.
You are free to find what I say strange but unfortunately for you, the Biblical Flood has bee totally refuted. Please understand that it doesn't matter how much evidence (and again, you have no evidence) for a Biblical Flood, if either of the Biblical Flood myths in Genesis had happened there is one piece of evidence that must be there, and it is not. It is as if you claimed to have hit the target but there is no hole on the target. Sorry, but as a Christian I really need to tell you to stop claiming the Biblical Flood happened, You are only making Christians look stupid.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 156 by mindspawn, posted 08-26-2013 3:23 AM | | mindspawn has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2